New York Assembly Bill A06609

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/6/25
• Refer: 3/6/25
• Report Pass: 6/5/25
• Refer: 6/5/25
• Report Pass: 6/6/25
• Engrossed: 6/6/25
• Refer: 6/6/25
• Engrossed: 6/11/25
• Enrolled: 11/17/25
• Chaptered: 11/21/25
• Passed: 11/21/25

Caption

Authorizes Karol Hughes, a part-time police officer, with the town/village of East Rochester police department to take the civil service examination and be eligible for appointment as a full time police officer for the town/village of East Rochester.

Summary

This bill is a special, person-specific civil service measure for Karol Hughes, a part-time police officer employed by the town/village of East Rochester in Monroe County. It overrides the usual age and other eligibility restrictions in section 58 of the Civil Service Law so that she may sit for the competitive civil service examination for police officer and, depending on her score, be placed on the eligible list for appointment as a full-time police officer. The bill also provides that Hughes remains subject to the ordinary merit and fitness requirements that apply to full-time police officers. In practical terms, it does not guarantee appointment; it only removes a legal barrier that would otherwise prevent her from competing for the position. The act takes effect immediately upon enactment.

Impact

The bill creates a narrow exception to New York Civil Service Law section 58, which generally governs age and other qualifications for police officer examinations. By carving out an exemption for a named individual, it allows Karol Hughes to compete for a full-time police officer position in East Rochester despite otherwise failing the standard eligibility criteria. The measure affects the town/village of East Rochester police department and the civil service appointment process, but it does not broadly amend statewide police hiring rules for other applicants.

Sentiment

The available voting history shows strong, unanimous support at every stage, including committee approval and final passage in both the Assembly and Senate. There is no recorded committee transcript indicating debate or opposition, and the bill advanced without any recorded dissent. The overall sentiment appears favorable and noncontroversial among legislators.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. The only potentially sensitive issue is the bill’s individualized nature: it grants a statutory exemption to a single named person rather than changing the law generally. Even so, the unanimous votes suggest that any concern about special treatment, civil service uniformity, or age-based eligibility was not politically divisive in this case.